Portable locks are convenient in that they can be interchangeably used to secure a portable item to a stationary or immovable object to prevent its removal, or to secure lockers by means of a hasp or entryway doors or fences by employing a chain. Some of the earliest portable locks were padlocks designed with an inverted U-shaped shackle which opened at the turn of a physical key. Locks employing U-shaped shackles are often inconvenient to attach with one hand, and can sometimes appear to be locked even when the shackle is not fully engaged, rendering the lock useless in practice.
Most mechanical locks can be picked at the keyway, or their physical keys copied. It is often cheaper to buy a new padlock than to re-key one if old keys have not been returned. Neither of these circumstances ensures practical security. Other problems with mechanical keyed locks include keyways that expose the insides of the lock to tampering or damage, and keys can only be made in a very limited number of physical combinations compared to commonly available encryption options. The use of combination locks limit physical access to the lock interior, but are still deficient with their severely limited number of combinatorial options, which are susceptible to cracking with patient application. These deficiencies increase the likelihood that a generic portable lock will be compromised by physical or mathematical means.
A recently employed method of remotely opening portable locks is the use of radio transceivers which activate the lock mechanism directly or by means of a motor. Remote electronic communication employing transceivers inside locks enable the user to open a lock by infrared (U.S. Pat. No. 7,948,359), by use of dedicated key-fobs (U.S. Pat. No. 7,382,250), or by combining a physical key with an attached transceiver element (U.S. Pat. No. 7,334,443). These solutions still require the user to carry a secondary physical key or fob in order to open each lock.
Some electronic locks use an RF activated motor to physically open the shackle of the lock, but this method requires an inefficient amount of power for a device that needs to operate reliably (U.S. Pat. No. 8,225,629, U.S. Pat. No. 7,948,359).
There remains a need for locks that are convenient and trustworthy to use. The lock design should ideally prevent ready access to the lock interior; allow the user to operate the lock reliably with the minimum of power for securement, and secure or open the lock by an encrypted wireless signal that is generated by a common device that is already carried by most users, e.g., a wireless smart phone or similar device. The following disclosure will provide detailed explanations and drawings of the various yet related solutions to the above outlined deficiencies in the prior art.